North/South Language Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 11 June (WA 44), who ensures the correct application of the North/South Language Body financial memorandum; and whether the North/South Joint Secretariat is bound by it as well.

Baroness Amos: Responsibility for ensuring adherence to the North/South Language Body's financial memorandum rests with the body and the sponsoring departments. The North/South Language Body's financial memorandum does not apply to the North/South Ministerial Council Joint Secretariat.

North/South Language Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 12 November (WA 199), which department was responsible for the incorrect title of the staff remuneration for the Language Implementation Body decision paper.

Baroness Amos: I have nothing further to add to the answer given on 12 November 2003 (WA 199).

North/South Implementation Bodies: Funding

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 17 November (WA 235), concerning the budget of the Ulster-Scots Agency, what were the "number of factors" which indicated the appropriate proportionality of funding in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003.

Baroness Amos: I have nothing further to add to my Answer given on 17 November 2003 (WA 235).

Special Advisers

Baroness Nicol: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans there are to amend the Code of Conduct for Special Advisers.

Baroness Amos: In their response to the ninth report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, the Government proposed an amendment to the Code of Conduct for Special Advisers to clarify the relationships between special advisers and permanent civil servants. In the light of comments made, the Government have decided to delete the reference to "instructions" in the opening paragraph. A revised amendment has been placed in the Library of the House.

Customs and Excise: Review of Current Practices

Baroness Dean of Thornton-le-Fylde: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will provide a response to Mr Justice Butterfield's review of current practices at HM Customs and Excise.

Lord Goldsmith: On 15 July 2003 the Government published in full the independent report of Mr Justice Butterfield into the current practices and procedures relating to disclosure, associated investigation techniques and case management in HM Customs and Excise's criminal cases. The Economic Secretary to the Treasury and I had asked Mr Justice Butterfield to examine the circumstances that led to the termination of the London City Bond prosecutions in Liverpool Crown Court on 25 November 2002, the changes in practice within Customs since the time of the cases to which those prosecutions related, and Customs' compliance with best practice in the use of investigation techniques. Mr Justice Butterfield also examined the preparation for and presentation of cases for court on behalf of customs.
	On publication of the report, as I said in my answer to Lord Barnett on 15 July [Official Report, col. WA 96–99], the Government accepted in full a number of Mr Justice Butterfield's recommendations, many of which have now been implemented. On the recommendation that, in order to make its independence from Customs even more transparent, the Customs and Excise Prosecution Office (CEPO) should become an entirely separate prosecuting authority accountable to me as Attorney-General, the Government undertook to provide a response in the autumn.
	In his report, Mr Justice Butterfield acknowledged the revitalisation of CEPO following the injection of additional resources and the improvement in the engagement with investigators. He referred to a palpable and detectable improvement in morale in CEPO. He went on to recommend that the solicitor for Customs and Excise should relinquish responsibility for prosecutions resulting from Customs investigations.
	The Government agree that, to be most effective, these prosecutors must be independent, and be seen to be independent by judges, barristers and solicitors in the wider criminal justice system. The Government consider it is essential that there should be full confidence in prosecutors acting on behalf of Customs and accept the case for radical change.
	The Government accordingly accept the recommendation of Mr Justice Butterfield to separate the prosecution and investigation functions in Customs, and to create an independent Customs and Excise Prosecutions Office during the course of 2004, led by a director accountable directly to me as Attorney-General. The office will be subject to a regular, independent and thorough inspection regime.
	The Government intend to move to appoint a director as soon as practicable, who will be closely involved in the creation of an independent CEPO.
	The Government also accept the recommendation that investigation legal advisers should now move to become the responsibility of HM Commissioners of Customs and Excise, and that these advisers will not be involved in the prosecution process. This arrangement will be reviewed after two years.
	The creation of an independent CEPO will require the resolution of a number of practical issues, to which the Economic Secretary and I are giving careful consideration.

Court Service: Headline Targets 2003–04

Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the headline targets of the Court Service executive agency for 2003–04.

Lord Filkin: The following table sets out the targets that have been set for the Court Service for 2003–04. Copies of the Court Service business plan for 2003–04 have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	
		
			 Headline targets Target 2003–04 
			 To support Local Criminal Justice Boards (LCJBs) in meeting their targets, including:  
			 reduction of Crown Court ineffective trials, contributing to an overall national reduction from 24 per cent to 17 per cent by March 2006; 4 per cent reduction 
			 the percentage of Crown Court defendants and appellants whose cases are heard within target time; 78 per cent 
			 the period from charge to sentence for persistent young offenders; and 71 days 
			 increasing sitting days in the Crown Court, facilitating the increase in the number of crimes for which an offender is brought to justice to 1.2 million by 2005–06 101,500 sitting days 
			   
			 Increase year on year the level of satisfaction in four key areas of service delivery To increase:  knowledge of court staff at the public counter  knowledge of court staff on the telephone  speed of resolution of complaints  helpfulness of written replies 
			 The percentage of public law Children Act cases dealt with within 40 weeks (from commencement to disposal) 70 per cent of cases dealt with within 40 weeks 
			   
			 The proportion of asylum cases to be cleared through decision and appeal 60 per cent of cases dealt with within target

Teaching Staff: Appointment and Dismissal

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many times the Secretary of State has determined the extent to which a chief education officer or local education authority can advise the governing body of a foundation or voluntary aided school, in the absence of an agreement between the school governing body and the local education authority, about the appointment or dismissal of teaching staff under Schedule 17 to the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 or, since 1 September, under the School Staffing (England) Regulations 2003.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: None.

Code of Practice on Local Education Authority-School Relations

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have withdrawn the statutory guidance on local education authority representations about head teacher appointments and performance in Annex 3 of the Code of Practice on Local Education Authority-School Relations in view of the publication of statutory guidance on the same issues under Sections 35(8) and 36(8) of the Education Act 2002; and, if so, how they have announced this decision.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: No element of the current version of the Code of Practice on Local Education Authority-School Relations, published in February 2001, has been withdrawn.

Code of Practice on Local Education Authority-School Relations

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to consult on a revised version of the Code of Practice on Local Education Authority-School Relations.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The Statement of Intent for Partnership Working, signed on 23 July 2003 by the Secretary of State for Education and Skills and the Local Government Association, included a commitment by the department to consider whether the Code of Practice on Local Education Authority-School Relations could benefit from review. This matter is under consideration and no decisions have yet been made.

Interim Executive Boards

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many interim executive boards they have consented to and how many they have not consented to, under Section 16A of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998; and what were their reasons for not consenting to the establishment of boards.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: Seven applications for interim executive boards from local education authorities have been considered and approved. Two further applications are under consideration. No applications have been rejected.

Autism: Children

Baroness Uddin: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will consider a special qualification for children with autism; and
	Whether they will consider a special record of achievement for children with autism; and
	How they will provide access to further and higher education for young people with autism.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The Special Educational Needs (SEN) Code of Practice gives statutory guidance to schools, local education authorities and others on assessing children's special educational needs and making provision to meet those needs, including the needs of children with autism.
	Autism is a spectrum disorder with children across the spectrum showing the full range of intellectual abilities. Many children within the spectrum can, with the right support, achieve in national curriculum assessments and external qualifications alongside their non-autistic peers. Special arrangements are available under the national curriculum and from awarding bodies to allow children with SEN to take examinations and tests on an equal footing.
	There are no qualifications or records of achievement that are specific to children and young people with autism. However, there is a range of arrangements for assessing the progress and recording the achievements of children with special educational needs, including those with autism, for whom the usual assessment arrangements and public examinations are not suitable. The department, with the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, has published guidance to help schools, including special schools, to set targets for children with SEN who are performing below national curriculum level 1 or within levels 1 and 2 in English, mathematics and science. The guidance contains performance criteria, the 'P' scales, which can be used to assess pupils' progress. Award schemes are available through which the key life skills of young people with SEN can be recognised and "progress files" can be used to record their academic and non-academic achievements. The working group on our 14 to 19 reforms, under the chairmanship of Mike Tomlinson, will be looking at assessment arrangements and how they can be used to motivate all learners.
	A primary aim of SEN support is to enable young people with SEN to make successful transitions from school to further education, training and adult life. The SEN Code of Practice, effective from January 2002, contains strengthened transition planning arrangements involving the Connexions service. In addition, under the Learning and Skills Act 2000, the Connexions service, on behalf of the Secretary of State, must carry out assessments of all young people with statements of SEN who are in the last year of compulsory schooling and are intending to go on to further education or training or higher education and may carry out assessments in other circumstances. The assessments are of the young person's education and training needs and the provision required to meet those needs. The Learning and Skills Council (LSC) must have regard to these assessments when arranging a young person's provision and the Connexions service is expected to work with the LSC and other providers to make suitable learning opportunities available to young people with SEN. Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, further and higher education and training providers must make reasonable adjustments to prevent discrimination against disabled students and potential students and, since September 2003, provide auxiliary aids and services.
	The Government will shortly be publishing its SEN strategy. The strategy will contain practical measures to support local education authorities and schools, working in partnership with others, in improving provision for all children and young people with special educational needs.

Foot and Mouth Disease

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many contractors and farmers are still owed money from the clean-up after the outbreak of foot and mouth disease; and what is the reason for delays in payment.

Lord Whitty: The department is disputing payment in those cases where it believes on the basis of the quantum, accounting and legal advice it has received that it was overcharged for goods, services and works during the FMD outbreak. In all other cases, the department has paid contractors and farmers for services provided in connection with the FMD clean-up operation.
	Additionally, there have been miscellaneous claims against the department arising from the outbreak of foot and mouth disease. The department responds to every claim on the facts of that claim.
	It is inappropriate for the department to offer public comment on these cases and claims in advance of or during forensic examination and investigation, formal disputes resolution procedures and litigation.

Illegal Food Imports

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why airlines are not obliged to make announcements to passengers on incoming flights that it is illegal to bring food over the allocated amount and plant products into the United Kingdom, and that those found guilty of doing so would be liable to a substantial fine.

Lord Whitty: There is no statutory requirement for airlines to inform passengers of the restrictions on imports of meat and other animal products. However, Article 2.2 of Commission Decision 2002/995/EC requires member states to make arrangements with international passenger transport operators to draw the attention of passengers to the animal health conditions for imports into the European Community of products of animal origin. Defra and HM Customs are working in co-operation with airlines, and an increasing number are making announcements or showing our information video in-flight.

Illegal Food Imports

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the current estimate of illegal food imports entering the United Kingdom in tonnes per year.

Lord Whitty: The Veterinary Laboratories Agency published a risk assessment report on 25 March 2003. This estimated the amount of illegal meat imported annually, on average, to be 7,500 tonnes, with 90 per cent certainty that the amount of illegal meat imported will range from 2,800 tonnes to 17,500 tonnes per year. Copies of the report have been placed in the House Libraries.
	The Veterinary Laboratories Agency will re-run the risk assessment to take into account the most recent data on meat seizures, which will result in a possible change to the estimates of the amount of meat imported. This will be part of a project due to report in March 2004.

National Heritage Act 1980: Government Indemnity Scheme

Lord Gregson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What were the details of any indemnity undertakings given under Section 16 of the National Heritage Act 1980 for the six-month period ending 30 September.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The provision for the Government Indemnity Scheme is made by the National Heritage Act 1980. The scheme facilitates public access to loans of works of art and other objects for public display made to museums, galleries and other such institutions by private owners and non-national institutions. It does this by indemnifying lenders against loss or damage to their loan. Loans covered by the scheme must be for public benefit. The scheme also covers loans of such objects for study purposes within borrowing institutions where this would contribute materially to the public's understanding or appreciation of the loan. Examples of this are enhancing interpretation or explanation to the public of objects or bringing into the public domain the conclusions of any study.
	In the six-month period ended 30 September, the following undertakings to indemnify were given under Section 16 by the relevant departments for objects on loan to national and non-national institutions:
	
		
			  Numbers 
			 Department for Culture, Media and Sport 610 
			 Scottish Executive Education Department 232 
			 The National Assembly for Wales 241 
		
	
	The value of contingent liabilities in respect of undertakings given at any time under Section 16 and which remained outstanding as at 30 September is:
	
		
			  £ 
			 Department for Culture, Media and Sport 2,954,237,461 
			 Scottish Executive Education Department 695,960,679 
			 The National Assembly for Wales 67,838,929 
		
	
	The value of non-statutory government indemnities to cover loans handled by the Government Art Collection and which remained outstanding as at 30 September is £4,500,000.
	The value of non-statutory undertakings given by Her Majesty in respect of loans from the Royal Collection and which remained outstanding as at 30 September is £170,694,295.

President Bush's Visit: Road Closures

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much prior notice Transport for London was given of road closures caused by the visit of President Bush to enable it to plan diversionary routes for its bus services.

Lord Davies of Oldham: General advance notice of the road closures impacting upon bus routes was given to Transport for London (TfL) during the planning stage, two to three weeks prior to the event. The more specific details around the actual routes to be used by the President were not disclosed until close to the event for security reasons.